Jump to content

Liverpool losing World Heritage status.


Featured Posts

1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

Because the photo you attached was of an eyesore?

 

 

It would be even worse without the blue sky.

The docks were certainly an eyesore, but a much more interesting one than today's 'improvements'. Looking south from the roof of Albert Dock in 1980.

S Docks 1980.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having just last week left Birkenhead on the Belfast ferry, the current state of the site of the football stadium was a real spoiler of the facade. If the whole area is uplifted to something that can attract a bigger footfall, then it would probably compensate for any loss of grants.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see they are now threatening Stonehenge and Botallack.

 

We can't preserve everything they want stuck in a moment of time, so I think we need to try to do our best for the locals and tell Unesco to take a hike. I bet Unesco have not paid a penny piece to help any conservation needed or as compensation for them loosing opportunities. I also wonder how sensible it is to encourage all this flying around the world, increasing the risk of pandemics, just t gawp at some view or another.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't much matter whether Stonehenge keeps its world heritage status or not -- it'll still be there. I note, however, that as a signatory to UNESCO the UK was supposed to establish a central fund to pay the upkeep of heritage sites, but instead of that they have left it to local authorities, and then slashed the Council Tax support grant.

 

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

I see they are now threatening Stonehenge and Botallack.

 

We can't preserve everything they want stuck in a moment of time, so I think we need to try to do our best for the locals and tell Unesco to take a hike. I bet Unesco have not paid a penny piece to help any conservation needed or as compensation for them loosing opportunities. I also wonder how sensible it is to encourage all this flying around the world, increasing the risk of pandemics, just t gawp at some view or another.

 

its like asking do michelin pays to restaurants for including their name in the list... it attracts tourists, especially foreign tourists who do not think its a bit of brick or stone, it about the story behind these boring bits of stone, being in a list allows you to sell your city much easily... so people fight to get into that list.

ultimately its for people of liverpool to decide, if they want ultra modern looking stadium, or other regeneration that makes their life easy, well its upto them. But they should not complain about consequences for which they had been warned very publicly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The paradox over Stonehenge is that the road design that threatens it is intended to preserve and enhance it - if Stonehenge loses protection then the A303 could be dualled at surface level. 

That said I can't help feeling that UNESCO's unease might actually be at the way the site has been treated already, a lot of sanitisation has gone on in the name of interpretation and preservation. 

I've linked to Somerset Live but there are other sources (Grauniad etc) for the same news. Those of a political bent may be interested to know we are "world leading" on heritage protection as well as everything else. 

 

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/stonehenge-could-follow-liverpool-losing-5694404

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Heartland said:

UNESCO has awarded heritage status to the Slate Quarries of North Wales now, following the cancellation of the Liverpool award.

 

I think I saw that fleetingly on last night's T.V. news, in between footage of people swimming very fast. I'm very pleased. I hope, as a former Festiniog Railway worker, that the various little railways which once served the slate quarries will be included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/07/2021 at 11:33, Machpoint005 said:

It doesn't much matter whether Stonehenge keeps its world heritage status or not -- it'll still be there.

 

It might still be there but no-one will know it.

 

It is one of the delights of England to drive along the A303 and crest the hill to see Stonehenge there in all its glory. I'd guess a couple of million people get to see it in passing every year. But now they want to hide it away out of view, so the only way to see it will be by paying £35 (my guess) to park five miles away and go there in a dedicated bus to a sterile "visitor centre", from which you'll probably be charged again to actually see it, still from 500 yards away, with your visit being minute-by-minute micro-managed rather like happens when visiting the Bayeux Tapestry. 

 

Friend of mine is an archeologist and surprisingly, he supports the tunnel plan, I think so the archs can have the place to themselves without being disturbed by the current hoards of gongoozlers currently turning up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/07/2021 at 12:50, pearley said:

On the one hand a lot of the old Dock area is derelict, and looks it but on the other the Mann Island development, the Ferry Terminal building and the Liverpool museum don't do much for the environment they are set in.

 

If Liverpool are serious to become a Cruise Ship destination then they need a decent terminal (Southampton has 4) Not the marquee in a car park with a rusting gangway leading to the pier, with its bus shelter type waiting areas. And it needs to be in the 'sensitive' area as that's where passengers want to be. Although it may have changed since we were last there.

 

All off the above is true.

 

Although there is an extent for arguing that if you are going to add new build to a historic site a 'contrasting' building style can help add clarity as to what is new and what is historic, it does also need to have consideration for how the overall site will then look afterwards, as well as for what historic artifacts might be lost underneath said new build. Which all said and done, likely stops short of flattening large amounts of historic dockland to the splat a great big new build on it.

 

I now live and work in Merseyside, and after 3 months living in Waterloo Warehouse, now with a house on the Wirral and a job in Speke and spend a reasonable about of time commute through and spend time in the city centre and to me the loss of Unesco as well as some of the decisions that have been made and or in the pipeline (including a proposal to build tower blocks in front of waterloo warehouse) are disappointing.

 

The amount of heritage in and around the docks of liverpool is amazing, but unfortunately most of what can been seen lies in the 'undeveloped wasteland' areas, and is being rapidly demolished, dug up, or covered over, with unsympathetic new bridges/paving/building projects.  

 

On short, it is not a surprise, because after some great work in the 80s to restore the dock areas, they are now taking a much more 'out with the old, in with the new' approach to concreting over the very reason it got Unesco status in the first place.

 

 

On 22/07/2021 at 12:55, Heartland said:

Why build a Football Stadium on the site of a dock. Could it be that there is a predatory developer hiding at the heart of the scheme, may be. There must be other places to build a football stadium.

 

It is a sad day in deed for a world heritage site to be lost. For those interested in history it is major blow. What could the Liverpool Council be thinking of. If there was no need for the dock, it could be joined to the Liverpool Link and become available for boaters.

 

*cough* Peel Holdings *cough*

 

The fact the Mayor was arrested for conspiracy to commit bribery and witness intimidation after a year long investigation into the matter speaks volumes to many.

 

 

Daniel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DHutch said:

On short, it is not a surprise, because after some great work in the 80s to restore the dock areas, they are now taking a much more 'out with the old, in with the new' approach to concreting over the very reason it got Unesco status in the first place.

 

 

It is hardly a surprise when you consider the 'new-normal' of writing out history if it is unpalattable to the wokes.

Liverpool being so strongly connected with the slave trade thru' being the biggest port handling sugar, tobacco and cotton from the Americas, in addition to being one of the biggest slaving ports with its ships dominating the transatlantic slave trade in the 2nd half of the 18th Century.

 

Liverpool Slave Museum :

 

The transatlantic slave trade | National Museums Liverpool (liverpoolmuseums.org.uk)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

It is hardly a surprise when you consider the 'new-normal' of writing out history if it is unpalattable to the wokes.

Liverpool being so strongly connected with the slave trade thru' being the biggest port handling sugar, tobacco and cotton from the Americas, in addition to being one of the biggest slaving ports with its ships dominating the transatlantic slave trade in the 2nd half of the 18th Century.

 

Liverpool Slave Museum :

 

The transatlantic slave trade | National Museums Liverpool (liverpoolmuseums.org.uk)

How can it be described as being written out when Liverpool has been very open about it's very strong links with the slave trade for as long as I can remember, nothing woke about it, just honesty about its history, if Liverpool pretended it played no part in the slave trade that would be writing out history.

 

The slave trade is part of the places history, along with the Beatles of course but they definitely overplay their hand there, far too much fab 4 stuff

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, pearley said:

Old enough to remember going to Stonehenge, parking in the road and walking amongst the stones and, shock horror,  touching them.

Them Druids had a hell of a job moving the stones when the clocks are changed.

  • Greenie 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

It is hardly a surprise when you consider the 'new-normal' of writing out history if it is unpalattable to the wokes.

Liverpool being so strongly connected with the slave trade thru' being the biggest port handling sugar, tobacco and cotton from the Americas, in addition to being one of the biggest slaving ports with its ships dominating the transatlantic slave trade in the 2nd half of the 18th Century.

 

Liverpool Slave Museum :

 

The transatlantic slave trade | National Museums Liverpool (liverpoolmuseums.org.uk)

I thought the general problem was with the anti-wokes getting upset when reminded where their good fortune came from? eg praising people as great philanthropists when in fact they murdered, enslaved and impoverished thousands of people, and refusing point blank to acknowledge the truth of history.

So much nicer just to pretend it's just kings and queens, even if it does turn out the current one is as corrupt as those who came before!

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/07/2021 at 08:45, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

It is hardly a surprise when you consider the 'new-normal' of writing out history if it is unpalattable to the wokes.

Liverpool being so strongly connected with the slave trade thru' being the biggest port handling sugar, tobacco and cotton from the Americas, in addition to being one of the biggest slaving ports with its ships dominating the transatlantic slave trade in the 2nd half of the 18th Century.

 

Liverpool Slave Museum :

 

The transatlantic slave trade | National Museums Liverpool (liverpoolmuseums.org.uk)

I am not sure it is that, as if nothing else and as you highlighted, they openly discuss the past and have a whole well promoted museum about it.

 

Plus while removing statues is a different topic, I dont think concreting over 200year old cobbles to build a glass sided tower block is intentionally about removing the history, more about just putting a quick buck ahead of retaining something all but unique.

 

Who knows. Obviously you cant preserve it all like a city-wide application of the BCLM, but I do like that with the original dock renovations they kept the rails and cobble and walls and original (still actively used) swing bridges, rather than dropping a modern fixed-deck I beam and concrete box over it and re-paving over the railway.

 

 

Daniel

 

Daniel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an aspect of our society where there are those that want to change history. They bring up certain facts which do not meet the present view and use them as justification for destruction or removal. Liverpool Docks might have had traffic associated with the slave trade, but so did other ports. It is a port that grew with the railway age and the variety of traffic that was generated by such links. That age began with Wapping Tunnel and the need to move goods such as cotton. Yet the traffic was much more varied than that. There was also the canal trade using the trows to move salt, pottery goods, pottery material and much more.

 

Liverpool is a complex port that originated from the first "pool" and grew into the first docks. When the World Heritage award was given, it was in recognition of that long history. Those in charge of the Dock Estate had simply to manage historical aspects with a sympathetic understanding of it. The loss of the Heritage award shows that those responsible did not do so. That is a tragedy! But the agents of change have a different agenda often with an eye to profit with little concern of the needs of the people. Very much like the slave masters, may be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Heartland said:

There is an aspect of our society where there are those that want to change history. They bring up certain facts which do not meet the present view and use them as justification for destruction or removal. Liverpool Docks might have had traffic associated with the slave trade, but so did other ports. It is a port that grew with the railway age and the variety of traffic that was generated by such links. That age began with Wapping Tunnel and the need to move goods such as cotton. Yet the traffic was much more varied than that. There was also the canal trade using the trows to move salt, pottery goods, pottery material and much more.

 

Liverpool is a complex port that originated from the first "pool" and grew into the first docks. When the World Heritage award was given, it was in recognition of that long history. Those in charge of the Dock Estate had simply to manage historical aspects with a sympathetic understanding of it. The loss of the Heritage award shows that those responsible did not do so. That is a tragedy! But the agents of change have a different agenda often with an eye to profit with little concern of the needs of the people. Very much like the slave masters, may be.

Trows never worked to Liverpool, the local coastal vessel was the Mersey flat, or the larger Jigger flat, which had a second mast towards the stern. Locally, cats were known as 'Jigger rabbits', a jigger being the term for the narrow passageway behind terraced houses. The last Jigger Flat was probably the Emily Barratt, seen here in London in 1982.

Emily Barratt 1982.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.